Hi Paolo,
Paolo Missier wrote:
> Hi Jun
> thank you for representing the group and for reporting!
> just to make sure: should I assume that the group was not concerned with
> SPARQL at all, and with closure operator extensions to SPARQL in particular?
Yes, that's not the concern of this workshop. They want to concentrate
on RDF core stuff and they want to keep new possible charters to the
minimum.
cheers,
Jun
>
> Cheers, -Paolo
>
>
> Jun Zhao wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> My slides can be found at [1]. The source file is available upon
>> request but it's only in Open Office format.
>>
>> The audiences are generally interested in our requirements. However,
>> not unexpectedly, not all of them fell within the scope of RDF core.
>> But our requirements did have big impact on putting Named Graphs and
>> mechanism for naming RDF graphs high in the agenda in the group
>> discussions.
>>
>> Some draft charters came out of the workshop, which can be found at
>> [2]. This will be sent out to the swig list very soon. Some kind of
>> working groups might be chartered late this year or early next year.
>>
>> There were a lot of tweets under the channel of #rdfn. The IRC logs
>> can also be found at [3, 4, 5]
>>
>> I am happy to give more updates in the next week's telecom.
>>
>> [1] http://www.slideshare.net/junzhao/2010-06-rdfnext
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/RDF_Core_Charter_2010#Graph_Metadata
>> [3] http://www.w3.org/2010/06/26-rdfn-irc
>> [4] http://www.w3.org/2010/06/27-rdfn-irc
>> [5] http://www.w3.org/2010/06/27-rdfn-meta-minutes.html
>>
>> cheers,
>>
>> Jun
>